uh-oh....this doesn't sound good.

[Jan]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Please explain. By "the sources" do you mean your sources? Are you saying that your sources are saying that the Film Jerk story is a plant by WB--a bogus plot synopsis that features new characters--in order to ease the fans into accepting new actors, before they spring on us the big "surprise" that the real plot features the old characters, but played by different actors?

OK, maybe that last question wasn't a very well constructed sentence. Hopefully you get my meaning.

I'm not CE (nor do I play...nevermind) but I can tell you what the sequence of events was in my case. A few weeks ago I started hearing rumblings along the lines of there being disagreement between JMS and WB about something to do with casting. Then I started hearing that WB was starting to feel that TMoS, being TV based, wasn't high-profile enough and so was negotiating with other studios. Then came the PW blurb that rang all sorts of alarm bells with me given it's lack of the usual information (such as the studio) or any source for it's information. Nobody I'm in contact with is familiar this supposed industry site. And then I got an email from Fireflower (who started this thread) verifying everything I've heard and with additional information about the casting issue.

Frankly, I agree with CE, that both the PW and the Filmjerk items may well be 'planted', an effort by the studio to convince JMS that the fans won't be upsed if they recast the characters with 'name', 'movie' actors.

I'll do anything I can to help prove them wrong.

Jan

 

[GaribaldisHair]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Then I started hearing that WB was starting to feel that TMoS, being TV based, wasn't high-profile enough

This is the bit that intrigues me ... TMoS has been on the drawing board for such a long time, how come they are only worrying about this now? Surely this issue should have been considered, addressed and put to bed way earlier in the process.

I know no one can answer that question. Just seems really odd to me.

 

[A_M_Swallow]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Then I started hearing that WB was starting to feel that TMoS, being TV based, wasn't high-profile enough and so was negotiating with other studios.

I can understand the studio bring in an A List director who has never hear of Babylon 5 or possibly they did a survey and found that Joe 6 pack had never heard of the cult show.

What does this stuff about other studios mean? Even at $150 million Warner Brothers could make a blockbuster themselves. A $400 million townbuster may be a different matter.

 

[Recoil]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Starsky & Hutch
Good movie, I enjoyed it, but it wasn't Starsky & Hutch. Like the new Battlestar Galactica, which is essentially a new show with a "classic" name attached to it for marketing purposes, so this is just a light comedy buddy cop movie with the S&H name attached to sell it.

Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson are great, but like RF they were just not Starsky & Hutch.

Why do people keep using Starsky & Hutch as an example of the current situation. Am I the only one who thought the purpose of Starsky & Hutch was *NOT* to make a true remake or try to re-create the feel of the original...but instead to make a parody/comedy based on it? It was almost like a spoof, and done so intentionally. IMO it was never meant to be true to the original TV Series...whereas a B5 movie would be, so I don't consider the two related.

I mean how can you have a movie made by Ben Stiller with Robert Vaughn in it, and think it is supposed to be anything but a comedy/spoof/parody?

 

[hypatia]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

I thought I read a long time ago that WB does have to get an o.k. from JMS to develop anything in the Babylon 5 universe. They might not have to listen to his every suggestion, but doesn't JMS have basic veto power in terms of any go-ahead?

 

[GaribaldisHair]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Hmmm ... you could be right hypatia, but my reading of this (many moons ago) was that they had agreed to give JMS the right to veto new things in th B5 universe, but that actually there was nothing JMS could do in the event that they decided to proceed in spite of his objections.

Just call me ... Mr Paranoid!

 

[hypatia]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

My memory is very fuzzy on what I read awhile ago. That might have been it: it might have been a kind of courtesy by, not a requirement of, Warner Brothers.

I was just over at the moderated group, and he posted something there either last night or this morning. So, again, it's rather noteable that he is saying nothing at all about these rumors.

Does anyone remember the first time I posted to the moderated group? It was some time ago. I popped over there, registered, and posted something like this:

"I heard at another messageboard that there were plans for a B5 movie, but that JMS wanted to wait until {something or other} had been released. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this rumor whatsoever?"

JMS immeidately posted "No."

So he doesn't seem to hesitate to jump right in and nip in the bud any totally false rumor.

So the more he is silent about this, the more I worry.

Would writing a second letter be of any help, or not, do you think?

 

[Chris Springob]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Frankly, I agree with CE, that both the PW and the Filmjerk items may well be 'planted', an effort by the studio to convince JMS that the fans won't be upsed if they recast the characters with 'name', 'movie' actors.

By "planted" I assume you mean that it was leaked by TPTB at WB rather than some underling who was spilling the beans on something that he/she wasn't supposed to. But what I'm asking about is, under this scenario in which the story was planted by TPTB, is the story true?. You can leak something that's true, or you can leak something that's false.

My own guess is that, if this was was leaked by higher ups at WB, then the plot description is basically accurate, although some of the names of characters might have been changed around. I mean, if WB executives did dream up their own B5 movie plot, I would assume that it would be about 10 times more ridiculous. It wouldn't include story elements from the actual B5 universe, like Galen's attempt to stop the spread of Shadow tech. My guess is that this Film Jerk stuff was either dreamed up by a fan with a decent knowledge of the B5 universe, or it's basically accurate, or it's basically accurate but with the names changed around.

I thought I read a long time ago that WB does have to get an o.k. from JMS to develop anything in the Babylon 5 universe. They might not have to listen to his every suggestion, but doesn't JMS have basic veto power in terms of any go-ahead?

I think JMS has something like a "first look" in his contract. WB has to give him the option of at least consulting on whatever B5 project they do, but they can always ignore his advice and do whatever they want in the end anyway. It's something like that. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, can I just add that the growth of this thread is amazing! 17 pages. When was the last time any thread outside of Babbleon reached 17 pages? It's about as common as a thread *within* Babbleon *not* reaching 17 pages.

And speaking of Babbleon, do you thinking that maybe there's a group of B5 fans that we still need to get the word out to on the recasting news and letter campaign? Like maybe, people on this very board who simply never look at the B5 world forum? Might there be people who only frequent Off-topic or Babbleon who actually don't know about this yet?

 

[wolfranger]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Also on posting to other sites make mention that the recasting might include the original cast. Over at the Battlestar Galactica site The only post to mine stated that he had only seen seasons 1-4. Though he loved the show he did not know who Lockley or Galen was and really didn't care if they got recast, and would only get upset if the original cast was recast which he didn't see mentioned as being in the movie.

 

[rangerPHIL]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

I think it would be interesting to see what JMS makes of all this. There might be after all a perfectly reasonable explanation for the rumours.

 

[hypatia]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

I think it would be interesting to see what JMS makes of all this. There might be after all a perfectly reasonable explanation for the rumours.

I thought the exact same thing. Until I saw him post to relatively less-important threads during these conversations.

He is not doing this by accident or because he is too busy. He is most defintely not coming straight out and saying "these new rumors are not true".

I do understand the need for gag-type orders when it comes to business dealings of this kind. He seems to be sending the only message he can right now, which I'd interpret to be:

"I can't say anything in regards to this issue."

 

[The_One]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

One thing I don't understand; why go for high profile actors, but a completely unknown director?

 

[PillowRock]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

With *very* few exceptions, directors do not "open" a movie. Actors do.

And the few directors who can "open" a movie just on their own name are people who get to pick their own projects, not get recruited to work in somebody else's pre-established universe.

 

[Elenopa]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Well, I've posted about this at 'Tarboard', the message board of The Arthur Ransome Society (Swallows and Amazons books). I know there are fans in the society.

Anyone else posted in a stranger place?

 

[kingfish]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Also being a fan of Battlestar Gallactica, I looked through the boards at The Colonial Fleets of Battlestar Galactica website, there was one post mentioning the babylon 5 movie being made. Another post mentioned that they thought WB was trying to do the Babylon 5 what was done to the original Battlestar Galactica. I posted the link to the save Babylon 5 site, explained what we know about the rumor, and asked for the help of the Battlestar Gallactice community.

I am the one at fleets that mentioned what happened to BG. The filmjerk site might be accurate about the B5 senerio. It was the same site that had the Ron Moore BG mini script on it. It showed what can happen if fandome falls by the wayside, an unrecognizable show.

 

[colonyearth]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Also, notice these little leaks don't contain any info on the main original cast or their roles in the film.

The sources have stated that that is planned in order to build acceptance of the film without the cast in that initial acceptance.

Please explain. By "the sources" do you mean your sources? Are you saying that your sources are saying that the Film Jerk story is a plant by WB--a bogus plot synopsis that features new characters--in order to ease the fans into accepting new actors, before they spring on us the big "surprise" that the real plot features the old characters, but played by different actors?

OK, maybe that last question wasn't a very well constructed sentence. Hopefully you get my meaning.

No...I'm saying it's a carefully crafted planned leak that purposefully does not mention any original cast roles, though, according to my source, they are in the film. If fans don't seem to react badly to a story that doesn't even mention the original cast (insinuating that they aren't in it), then the fans, at least in their suit oriented minds, won't mind the cast being replaced by new actors if they were to be in it.

You, unfortunately, have to understand the suit way of thinking...it's very scary...but I've had to learn to read it.

As for why this is happening so late, that is also not unusual...as eleventh hour attempts to alter things happen all the time, especially by suits who figure that if they spring it this late, it'll slide by. They didn't plan on JMS or the fans.

As for "leaked" that usually is almost always planned. The majority of industry leaks are plants, issued for any number of reasons, not the least of which is free publicity and to get a buzz going.

The "leaked" info that keeps coming out is mysteriously not mentioning any of the original cast characters, though Jan and I both have independently confirmed that they are in it. That is suspect.

The secret to any leak or manipulative lie is to plant it within a truth. Therefore, while the storyline we're hearing about it most likely the correct one...or at least very close, they are not bringing up the main characters on purpose...which should cause one to ask, "why?"

Reason, because they want to get the fans accustomed to the idea of B5 without the cast...once that's done, they spring on them the idea that the cast has been recast.

WB has pulled stunts like this before, but fan outcry has caused them to suddenly tailspin and say, "We were only talking about it...we weren't actually going to do it." This in regards to Batman at one time. And Paramount has done the same thing in the past with Trek, leaking a story involving a young Kirk, Spock, and McCoy and the idea of recasting them for a new film. The fans reacted almost violently about the idea and Paramount backed off.

The hope here is that the same fan reaction will bring about the same response from WB..."Ok, you get to keep your cast." Or something along the lines of, "We were only talking...we didn't mean it."

Either way, the letters and believe it or not, the net buzz surrounding this will most likely be effective (at least that's the precident). But don't be fooled, WB has people watching us in these forums...that I can gaurantee you. So stand firm and don't even show the slightest signs of wavering or accepting a recasting...or they'll go back and say, "They're breaking."

Now, that said, I again state that I can and do understand the recasting of Galen, given that PW is not apparently available, since he'll be shooting with the master, Sir Richard Attenborough at the time.



CE

 

[GaribaldisHair]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

Now, that said, I again state that I can and do understand the recasting of Galen, given that PW is not apparently available, since he'll be shooting with the master, Sir Richard Attenborough at the time.

The irony being, of course, that he is possibly the original cast member who has had the highest movie profile in recent years.

For me, if they do make a movie with new actors in the roles then it will just smack of WB wanting to make a SF movie and slap the B5 name on it because ... well, because they can!

A guy over on the JMSNews forums put it best.

Say "Hell, No" to fake B5.

 

[Za_Ha_Dum]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

The secret to any leak or manipulative lie is to plant it within a truth. Therefore, while the storyline we're hearing about it most likely the correct one...or at least very close, they are not bringing up the main characters on purpose...which should cause one to ask, "why?"

Reason, because they want to get the fans accustomed to the idea of B5 without the cast...once that's done, they spring on them the idea that the cast has been recast.

Well, If this rumor is really correct, than I would ask all the people here to start making phone calls to WB in Los Angeles and any part of the world they have office or representative. Try to talk to anyone from Public Relation and Marketing department. That could be a better and faster way to express our protest. Writing letters will also help, however since it is an EMERGENCY (since schedules are really tight now).

Regards,

Cadu
Zahadum

 

[A_M_Swallow]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

The link to the Canadian website gives the guest characters any of which could be named stars.

The female intelligence officer is a male role in drag. They will have to pick an actress that can do it; some can only play the girlfriend.

Question for the suits why bother risking your jobs over this? Every reviewer in the world now knows about the attempted recasting and will blame a poor film on the executives. The guest roles cover the name stars and mistresses so they are not valid reasons.

 

[sleepy_shadow]

Re: uh-oh....this doesn\'t sound good.

That they are looking for someone to fill in for Galen... makes it plausible that they *will* substitute any original character.

Perhaps, without the information having reached us, they are actually looking for substitutes for other characters too. I am certain that Joe Random will make an excellent Londo, and Jane Random will easily pass for Delenn.

Sorry, Warner... I have yet to receive information of Peter Woodward refusing your offer. Unless I receive that, you may forget my contribution to ticket or DVD sales.